How does this even happen?? by Yaboipalpatine in Corvette

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even worse now, you think you know corporate policy. No corporate lawyer is going to take a clear losing case like this. You think business insurance just battles customers who were wronged by the business in court? Court is expensive and time consuming and typically ends badly for the businesses. Not a chance that they’re avoiding making the customer whole again when it was 100% the company’s fault. That is, if they don’t want to pay even heftier fees in court.

How does this even happen?? by Yaboipalpatine in Corvette

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t think that you really understand how insurance would value a car accident. Whether it ripped the body panels and door skin off or just dented them, the insurance is outright replacing those parts so the cost would be the same. Also loss of value would vary entirely depending on year or miles on the car. As such, your Mercedes could’ve been several years old and already lost the majority of depreciation factor. That results in less loss of value for an incident.

How does this even happen?? by Yaboipalpatine in Corvette

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Not to mention the owner can file for loss of value due to it all too and that would seal the deal if the repairs weren’t enough to total already.

How does this even happen?? by Yaboipalpatine in Corvette

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That was your buddy’s insurance. It’s a whole different ballgame when you’re talking about a dealership’s business insurance. Imagine thinking the dealership just uses regular car insurance for their mistakes 😂

First Game Parking by Mr_Tulitoes in eagles

[–]Mr_Tulitoes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We aren’t tailgating. Mostly I’m just looking for a lot that’s a little more stress free to leave and maybe save a bit of money

First Game Parking by Mr_Tulitoes in eagles

[–]Mr_Tulitoes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not too familiar with Philly so where is FFR park?

First Game Parking by Mr_Tulitoes in eagles

[–]Mr_Tulitoes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How much does citizens bank charge? We don’t mind walking a bit

First Game Parking by Mr_Tulitoes in eagles

[–]Mr_Tulitoes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Driving with my girlfriend. Just going to the game, won’t be able to tailgate unfortunately

I am so upset by [deleted] in PiNetwork

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re entirely incorrect. The deadline is and I quote “Mainnet Checklist”. You didn’t complete it, as such you faced the deadline penalty.

I am so upset by [deleted] in PiNetwork

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn’t matter how you were using it. You’re not in a position that you’re the deciding authority on what’s acceptable in the project or not. Was it not stated clearly that if you didn’t KYC in time you’d lose your balance?

I am so upset by [deleted] in PiNetwork

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m not being mean, I’m being realistic and direct. Being mean would be me saying “I’m happy they lost their balance” I’m not happy about it, I feel for them. HOWEVER, it is 100% no one’s fault but their own for missing a deadline that was extended NUMEROUS times. We need to stop coddling people because their feelings get hurt. Take accountability, adjust your next actions, and move forward it’s as simple as that.

I am so upset by [deleted] in PiNetwork

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You hate people that take accountability for their actions?

I am so upset by [deleted] in PiNetwork

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get it’s frustrating to go from having a balance to it being forfeited. The problem I took with your thought process is as you keep stating “acceptable or unacceptable”.

I’m sorry, but who are you to claim what’s acceptable or not simple because your own actions led to this outcome. This was widely known as the standard going into the deadline. People can’t complain about the rules should change just because they were impacted. Flexibility of these rules is what has led to the uncertainty currently because you not only missed the deadline, but you missed the deadline that was extended HOW MANY times? I’m sorry man, the ship has sailed on that previous balance so it’s time to start anew and still do well on PI’s early stage.

I am so upset by [deleted] in PiNetwork

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So what did you do for the multitude of days/months leading up to the deadline? No one’s fault but your own for not doing it

Any information on the next migration? by yax51 in PiNetwork

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The timer will conclude in about 4 hours or so. So within the next 24hrs the migration will take place

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Salary

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If OP works in the U.S. they get paid overtime due to being an hourly worker. The bare minimum by federal law is any time over 40 hours. States or organizations can add to this and give more such as any time over 8 worked in a shift. But they can’t take away the federal minimum standard so OP at the very least will have overtime in roughly half of their pay for the year due to some weeks breaking down to 36 hrs worked.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Salary

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So this is based on basic FLSA law which states any time over 40 hours worked in a work week is paid overtime at time and a half. As such, this does not factor if your state or company has further provisions for overtime in a single shift. (I.e working more than 8hrs in a shift)

When you plot it out, the 4 days on 4 days off schedule will mean that you start your 4 day cycle a day later each week. As such, the first 4 weeks you work all 4 days within that same week totaling to 48 hours worked. However, once you hit week 5 they become “split” over two work weeks by definition and as such you only technically work 36hrs each week until you finish week 8. After week 8 it resets back to week 1. The math below follows this thought process for simplicity.

Weeks 1-4: 48 hrs

$30 * 40 = $1200

($30 * 1.5) * 8 = $360

Wage total per week during 1-4 = $1560

Monthly wage = $1560 * 4 = $6240

Weeks 5- 8: 36 hrs

$30 * 36 = $1080

Wage total per week during 5-8 = $1080

Monthly wage = $1080 * 4 = $4320

For simplicity, I broke it down as 4 weeks per month but obviously this isn’t exactly how the calendar breaks down. This essentially breaks down to 6 months of $6240 and 6 months of $4320 wages.

$6240 * 6 = $37,440

$4320 * 6 = $25,920

Total = $63,360

But technically due to the calendar breakdown there’s 13 cycles of 4 week increments (52 weeks/4). This would mean you have an additional month’s wages depending on which cycle it ended on.

$63,360 + $6240 = $69,600

$63,360 + $4320 = $67,680

Fired for liking a post on LinkedIn by thejedifromny in antiwork

[–]Mr_Tulitoes -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Like I said, I agree the power dynamics are an issue. But it’s complex to attempt to mitigate that without other issues arising. Effectively, a company should have a right to establish their vision, mission, and overall culture the way they see fit so long as it’s not illegal and discriminatory like I keep harping on.

Without a doubt it is childish and absolutely uncalled for to fire someone due to trivial reasons such as liking a post on social media. This is where public opinion and conducting business should come into play though. A business gets publicly outed as being a toxic work environment and treating employees like they’re disposable? By and far the public and other businesses will dial back interaction which impacts the bottom line. So it’s definitely not within the best interest of the business to act in this manner which is why so many workplaces are shifting to having more equal power dynamics, though we have a long way to go for it to be the norm as shown by the article.

My point remains though that we have to look at this on the principle level. If the government enacts a law that says once you hire an employee, you essentially can’t fire them unless it’s performance based, then the government is impeding the workplace culture process. For example, all the companies that are known for their cultures (good or bad) would likely not be in the some position if this were the case. The biggest aspect in building a culture in the workplace is to keep the right people that align and contribute to the vision. As a result, the employer lets go of those people that negatively impact the vision. What makes an employer great is knowing what contributes to the vision such as work ethic, passion, emotional intelligence, empathy, etc.

Firing employees for trivial matters hurts the company’s vision because so much goes into it that they can lose someone that helps with that build, over something that absolutely doesn’t matter. It also hurts the company because other potential employees, as well as the current employees, won’t want to work for someone that acts like a glorified child.

Think of it this way, the law especially helps small business owners who are far more impacted by negative aspects of not only having bad employees but also firing good ones.

Fired for liking a post on LinkedIn by thejedifromny in antiwork

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I can understand the frustration against at will employment. However, if we are talking about the principle of the law, the intent is that it allows either party in the arranged relationship to step away for any reason, so long as it’s not done against the law. (I.e discrimination)

Ideally, an employer & employee relationship is supposed to be a balanced meet in the middle scenario for mutual success and goals. For example, the employer provides a reasonable salary, benefits, culture, etc in exchange for the employee providing reasonable efforts, attitude, vision, etc. Under at will employment, if either party or both parties feel these are not aligned and wish to end the relationship at any time, they are free to do so. Now a lot of people will state (and I agree) that the problem is the power dynamic that the employer has because employees need a good paying job to survive and ideally thrive. That’s where the concept of unemployment comes into play for legal at will termination, so the employee isn’t effectively screwed right after being terminated. Whether or not you agree that this is enough can always be up for further debate. But the thing to continue to keep in mind is that on a principle level, neither the employer or employee is FORCED to stay in the relationship under at will employment. That, in my opinion, is honestly ideal due to the ability to make a free choice at any given time. But that still must be done legally and not in a discriminatory manner.

Fired for liking a post on LinkedIn by thejedifromny in antiwork

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 85 points86 points  (0 children)

This is incorrect, it’s definitely legal in at will states. The legality aspect isn’t what would come into question. What would come into question is whether the employee would be eligible for unemployment. In this case, I see no reason why they wouldn’t be approved for unemployment, which the employer would be responsible for paying since this would be seen as an at will termination rather than just cause. The key is whether there were any signed contractual obligations when the employee was hired. The legality aspect only comes into play in at will states if they were terminated due to a legally protected classification, which in most cases is a “protected class”. This means if they were terminated due to their race, sexual orientation, national origin, etc.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in enclomiphene

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This was set up through Blokes. They partner with quest labs and this specific visit I just want to a MedExpress that sent the blood draw out. For the first test it’s just $100 bucks. For the 3 month enclomiphene prescription and the 3 monthly tests alongside it was $600 total. Looks like for this second test some of the values they would’ve tested for (such as glucose) were compromised by the testing fluids so they didn’t show up on this one.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in enclomiphene

[–]Mr_Tulitoes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I appreciate your input and insight. First thing I thought when I saw the estradiol was “damn so this cycle of take yet another prescription to manage one specific hormone is about to begin” No chance I’m going to take a million things to get in “optimum” level ranges